Conservative Picks for the Maryland Pirmary

Democrats have a stranglehold on Maryland, but that grasp was so disastrous under the leadership of Martin O’Malley that Larry Hogan was elected Governor. Looking to red pill the state are numerous Republican contenders. Indeed, there are no shortages of candidates in the old line state. But in this surplus is an overload of non-serious candidates. Now, its hard to expect people to commit a whole lot when the cards are stacked against them but they can do a little better. For candidates in Maryland, it’s not the Trump endorsement they seek, rather its the Governor’s. Expectations are low but a statewide glitch with the change of residencies is sure to hinder turnout. Kinda makes me wish voter ID was here. Either way, good candidates like Liz Matory can make their longshots a little less long. Upsets in Maryland can happen, see Larry Hogan 2014.

Best Candidate: Liz Matory

Worst Candidate: John Walsh

Best Race: District 2

Worst Race: District 6

US Senate

I’ve never seen so many candidates line up to take an ass whooping. However very few of this wide field are serious contenders. The most formidable candidate is Chris Chaffee because in 2016 he came in second with a whopping 13.7% of the vote. He seems alright, but unimpressive. Christina Grigoriancomes off as a RINO. Albert Howard comes off as a nut. Bill Krehnbrink reportedly trends towards libertarian with an Everybody’s Gotta Go message that could have general election appeal. Nnabu Eze could be a red pill for Maryland’s above average immigrant population. He’s also a solid conservative. Blaine Taylor is a former Democrat and isn’t completely cleansed of leftism. Then there are a bunch of nonserious candidates or past losers who likely won’t get past Chaffee. There is no stand alone pick here.

Conservative Pick: Nnabu Eze or Bill Krehnbrink

District 1

Andy Harris of the Eastern Shore is a Freedom Caucus member and Maryland’s only Republican, thanks to the redistricting. His record through four terms is impressive. He has two challengers. Lamont Taylor seems just as Conservative. Martin Elborn is definitely to the left of Harris. Tough call, but Harris hasn’t been in office for two long.

Conservative Pick: Andy Harris

District 2

Liz Matory is the most serious candidate and she is a solid Conservative. Unlike Taylor (Senate candidate), she became a Republican and holds to principled Conservatism. She would make a fine competitive candidate.

Conservative Pick: Liz Matory

District 3

Neither candidate in this race is particularly serious.

Conservative Pick: None

District 4

George McDurmott is unopposed.

District 5

Johnny Rice is the MAGA candidate and also the only semi-serious candidate.

Conservative Pick: Johnny Rice

District 6

This vacated seat might just be competitive (again) as it features Conservative western Maryland. Kurt Elsasser is most likely to be the RINO. Amie Hoeber is poised to take this race seeing as she has the coveted endorsement of Governor Larry Hogan. She seems as though she would be a major spender. Nothing indicates on her campaign otherwise.Brad Rohrs is the Conservative horse in this race. His campaign is upfront about Conservatism immediately. Lisa Lloyd is also a decent candidate.

Conservative Pick: Brad Rorhs

District 7

William Newton seems like a nut, a nut that would vote the right way I suppose. Ray Bly is unelectable following a 1988 child abuse and 4th-degree sex offense (statutory). Thankfully there is Richmond Davis who is a solid libertarian-style Conservative.

Conservative Pick: Richmond Davis

District 8

John Walsh is a hardcore RINO. Either Victor Williams or Bridgette Cooper would make a good candidate.

3 migrant caravan claims Jim Acosta made to President Trump that have been debunked… by the migrant caravans

CNN’s Jim Acosta has been at the center of the news cycle for 12 days. It’s not his reporting that landed him there. He’s the center of attention after the Secret Service suspended his hard pass to the White House. His pass is back and most seem to be moving on from the story. But something has been lost in the mix. The statements he made while badgering the President on November 7 were spoken with authority and certainty.

Less than two weeks later, all three of his claims have been proven wrong by the migrant caravans themselves.

“They’re hundred of miles away, though. They’re hundreds and hundreds of miles away.”

Around 3,000 migrants arrived in the last few days, doubling the total number of migrants waiting to be processed at the San Ysidro border crossing to 6000. Thousands more are expected in the coming days.

More than 500 criminals are traveling with the migrant caravan that’s massed on the other side of a San Diego border crossing, homeland security officials said Monday afternoon.

The revelation was made during a conference call with reporters, with officials asserting that “most of the caravan members are not women and children”. They claimed the group is mostly made up of single adult or teen males and that the women and children have been pushed to the front of the line in a bid to garner sympathetic media coverage.

By now, any thinking person regardless of political ideology should realize Jim Acosta is an idiot. In the short time he held the mic at the press conference, he made three debunked statements. Journalists are supposed to expose the truth, not spread lies.

Related

Beto 2020 is real and Republicans shouldn’t ignore it

Any time a candidate for one office says they will not run in for a different office later, don’t believe them. It’s a pre-election narrative to dispel rumors from their opponents that the first office is just a stepping stone. It also gives a sense of urgency to the candidate’s potential voters. Put me in office now because you won’t get a chance later, or so the story goes.

If anything, someone saying they won’t run for a higher office later is a sure indicator they will consider running for a higher office later. That’s why when Representative Beto O’Rourke (D-TX) said he wouldn’t run for President in 2020 whether he won his Senate race or not, I took it as a sure sign he would definitely run if he did well in Texas. I figured if he got blown away, he was done. If he won the Senate race, he’d probably wait until 2024 if President Trump won in 2020 or 2028 if a Democrat won in 2020.

The only way he’d run in 2020, by my estimation, was if he lost but came close. He lost to Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) by just over 200,000 votes. Cruz won in 2012 by over 1.2 million votes.

What I considered the trigger scenario for a Beto 2020 presidential run happened. Now, we’re seeing stories like these:

Sparked by his narrow defeat in a Texas Senate race, Beto O’Rourke is scrambling the 2020 presidential primary field, freezing Democratic donors and potential campaign staffers in place as they await word of his plans.

Even prior to O’Rourke’s meteoric rise, many Democratic fundraisers had approached the large number of 2020 contenders with apprehension, fearful of committing early to one candidate. But the prospect of a presidential bid by O’Rourke, whose charismatic Senate candidacy captured the party’s imagination, has suddenly rewired the race.

Before anyone comes to the conclusion I think I “called it,” I’m acutely aware that I missed Beto by a mile. Yes, I believed that the scenarios were aligned so that a close defeat would propel him to a 2020 presidential bid, but I also had assumed until about a week before the election that he was going to lose by a wide margin. Even on election day I predicted 7.5%. He lost by 2.6%, which in Texas means I missed it by nearly half a million votes. No, I didn’t see the risk he represented properly.

I see it now.

He has three major things going for him that, to me, make him the person to watch over the next year at least.

He’s the best fundraiser in the nation. Period. For a Senate race, he was able to raise $38 million in the third quarter alone and nearly $70 million total. This is small fries for a presidential run, but the only other Senate candidate to come close was Rick Scott in Florida. The #3 and #4 fundraisers – Claire McCaskill in Missouri and Bob Hugin in New Jersey – were able to raise $63 million combined. If he raised that much for a Senate race, he would be able to easily eclipse Hillary Clinton’s 2016 totals. The only person who is arguably better than O’Rourke at fundraising is Barack Obama, and he’ll surely be helping O’Rourke if he gets the nomination.

His national appeal is similar to Barack Obama’s. To be more accurate, his national appeal far exceeds Barack Obama’s appeal when he ran for the Senate in Illinois. These are different days so we can’t assume his head start on appeal will translate into more popularity than the former President if he were to win the nomination, but it bodes well for O’Rourke that he’s still getting a ton of attention two weeks after losing an election. At this point in 2016, even Democrats were begging Hillary Clinton to go away. But they haven’t had their fill on Beto yet.

He has nothing better to do. When the incoming representatives are sworn in next year, he’ll be a free man. Free to hang out in Iowa and New Hampshire. Free to attack Republicans over policies and Democrats over failures. Free to talk to bundlers, strategists, journalists, and voters. While his competition will be sitting in Senate committee meetings or running their business, O’Rourke will be in 2020 mode without having to hide it. Losing may have been a blessing in disguise.

The midterm elections demonstrated opposition to Trump is as rabid as his support. It’s hard to imagine someone as far to the left as O’Rourke winning. Then again, it was hard to imagine him getting over 48% of the vote in Texas.

Related

So-called conservatives are confusing compromise with capitulation

If it wasn’t for the fact that I’m Always Right™, it would be easy to get discouraged by some of the reactions I get for taking so-called conservatives to task whenever they exchange their pusillanimous principles for their personal political purposes.

While not discouraging, it can be frustrating when members of various political factions put their so-called leaders on a pedestal to be lionized, almost worshiped, even when they break their promises or promote policies that are contrary to our conservative values.

An obvious example of what I’m talking about can be seen by the dwindling numbers of Trump’s cult-like sycophants who live not on bread alone, but on every word that proceeds from the mouth of their political god.

Lately, I’ve witnessed this same kind of unconditional loyalty for so-called conservative members of Congress who, despite their rhetoric to the contrary, are talking the conservative talk but not walking the conservative walk.

Just as I’m often told by the Trump cult, Lee’s groupies have informed me that he is beyond reproach and that only a “George Soros-loving Hillary supporter” would dare call him out because “nobody’s perfect.” Check out a couple of the comments from my Facebook page:

Brady S. – “If you’re waiting for perfection, keep waiting, you’re never going to get it from any person. You can disagree with a person on an issue and policy, that doesn’t negate the rest of decisions they’ve made or who they are as a person. Basically, you’re virtue signaling, piggy backing off the backs of other conservatives to show how much more supposedly principled you are. One conservative once said “The person who agrees with you 80% of the time is a friend and an ally not a 20% traitor.” Ronald Reagan. Nobody is going to agree with you 100% of the time on everything, you’d be wise to learn that lesson.”

While we are indeed imperfect beings, we aren’t supposed to use that as an excuse to settle for less than perfection. Instead, we are to press on toward the goal of perfection and continue reaching for those things that will bring it to pass. And we are also instructed to “judge righteously” the deeds (actions) of others.

I also hear a lot about compromise — a word as equally misunderstood as the word judging — but compromise only applies to how we achieve the goal; it doesn’t apply to the goal itself. When you change the goal instead of the methodology, that’s capitulation, not compromise.

For example, so-called conservatives promised to defund Planned Parenthood and could have compromised on how to get it done in a myriad of ways. Instead, they capitulated by passing spending bills that fully funded the baby butchers in exchange for defense spending and keeping the government open.

To quote a well-known insurance commercial, “That’s not how this works. That’s now how any of this works.”

When their rhetoric fails to match their results, and when they capitulate on our goals and call it compromise, I will call out faux-conservatives regardless of what faction they belong to.

And despite accusations from supporters of Trump, Cruz, Lee, and other so-called conservatives, not every politician needs to measure up to my standards . . . but they should.